Mail from our readers
After sorting through more than 1,700 letters from wrestling fans itching for a fight, we feel as if we’ve been pummeled by big bad ”Stone Cold” Steve Austin himself. And that’s exactly what most of you were hoping for. ”This issue (#481, April 16) with the WCW’s Goldberg on the cover was a slap in the face. It disgusts me that you guys didn’t feature Austin and, in my opinion, the better WWF on the cover,” growled Travis Hennings of Westlake, Ohio. Why Goldberg over Austin? Simple: We picked the guy with the meanest mug. Not that Austin can’t be mean. In fact, given his bison biceps and tendency to slam people he doesn’t like, we thought it’d be smart to offer an olive branch. At right, the cover not taken.
Rumble and Grumble
Hallelujah!!! It’s about time somebody recognized wrestling fans. As a 24-year-old college-educated woman, I’m proud to say I love this stuff. I look forward to the antics and shenanigans of the fabulous-looking men each week. It has all the elements of a great television program: drama, heartbreak, romance, excitement, and intrigue! Not to mention really buff men in tight wrestling shorts!
Re: your cover story ”How Did Wrestling Get So Big?”…H.L. Mencken is known for saying that no one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses.
You made an error. You got the two bald guys mixed up. You accidentally used Goldberg for the main photo on the cover, and ”Stone Cold” Steve Austin as an inset. It should have been the other way around. Don’t feel bad, lots of people get them confused. I think it’s the whole reason the WCW played up Goldberg in the first place.
I just read your cover story on professional wrestling. In it, I found ”labyrinthine,” ”internecine,” ”ambiguous,” ”maelstrom,” ”ancillary,” and many other polysyllabic words. That booming sound you just heard was 35,000,000 wrestling fans collectively saying, ”Huh?”
We enjoyed your cover story and we appreciate the attention your magazine lavished on the phenomenon we have created. Your cover was misleading however. The Stone Cold Clone, Goldberg, has little to do with the success your article describes. And those 35 million fans you mentioned? In recent head-to-head Monday-night matchups, over 65 percent of them were Steve Austin’s and the WWF’s. You wouldn’t happen to be owned by the same parent company as the WCW, would you? I agree that it takes guts to put Austin on the cover of EW if you work for Time Warner. However, there’s no excuse for putting a distant second on your cover when your readers deserve to know who is No. 1.
World Wrestling Federation
Sit, Com, Play Dead
You seem to be in a quandary about the reason that most of today’s sitcoms are below par (”Death of the Sitcom”). Why? In an industry where any writer over 30 is considered over the hill, it’s logical that shows with asinine dialogue and recycled plots are the norm. Maybe it’s time that they realize pratfalls and silliness are no substitute for substantive writing by experienced veterans in the field.
Someone finally wrote an article about the increasing stupidity of sitcoms. Not only are there too many of them, but studios seem to think that the viewers are mindless idiots who can’t figure out what humor is. S–tcoms is what they should be called.